Why didn't development pop up among I-5 in the Central Valley?

[kkt]

But the 2000-02 "tech" recession and the housing crisis five years later proved too much for even the "SIU"-type plans for eastern Fresno;

What's SIU stand for?

[sparker]

Because the country needs someplace to source fresh produce during the cold half of the year... 

Which feels strange once you realize how much of northern latitudes San Joaquin Valley and Sacramento Valley are located at.

The northern border of California is at 42 degrees north, which is roughly the same latitude as Detroit, Chicago, and southern New England. Yet the latter locations get winters that are A LOT colder and snowier than the same latitude in California (excluding the mountains).

Much of the reason for the Midwest/Eastern chill are the Arctic storms coming down across the Canadian Shield; even worse is the snow-heavy stuff that shoots directly down mountain-range free through west-central Canada and into the Dakotas and south beyond.  I've encountered this "heavy shit" as far south as I-20 near Big Spring.  As far as far-north CA is concerned, the flatlands east of US 97 get much colder than the canyons and the valleys in the more mountainous western area; winter crops such as horseradish are growing staples there.  Part of the reason for that chilly zone is the fact that while eastern OR features a lot of hilly areas that are a PITA to drive through, those hills just aren't that high, rarely exceeding 5K feet between US 97 and US 395 -- it's easy for Canadian-origin storms to barrel south through eastern Washington (famous for winter wheat!) and across OR into NE CA.  Once there, the mountains to the south break up the storm patterns and mix them with fronts coming in from the ocean.  But right up on the state line it's like a Midwest plain! 

[sparker]

But the 2000-02 "tech" recession and the housing crisis five years later proved too much for even the "SIU"-type plans for eastern Fresno;

What's SIU stand for?

SIU = Section of Independent Utility; in this case, it would refer to the portion of the proposed CA 65 corridor that skirts the Fresno metro area to the east and would make a nice eastern bypass of the developed region.  South of there -- roughly from CA 198 north to CA 180 -- it passes through the Valley's (and currently the state's, due to many SoCal areas being supplanted by housing!) premier citrus-growing area; its value would be as egress for shipping out of there  -- particularly if the segue onto CA 152 had materialized.  North of CA 41 and/or 152, not so much; its proposed trajectory headed for less-developed and more "foothill" areas rather than down in the principal agricultural production zone. 

[skluth]

Because the country needs someplace to source fresh produce during the cold half of the year... 

Which feels strange once you realize how much of northern latitudes San Joaquin Valley and Sacramento Valley are located at.

The northern border of California is at 42 degrees north, which is roughly the same latitude as Detroit, Chicago, and southern New England. Yet the latter locations get winters that are A LOT colder and snowier than the same latitude in California (excluding the mountains).

Roughly the same latitude as Barcelona which has palm trees.

[SeriesE]

^^^

Even now it still feels weird how quickly Fresno dissipates from downtown immediately west of south of 99 (99 is also lined but by the Union Pacific for those that don't know).  The Railroad survey takers from the Central Pacific certainly did a masterful job at plotting out a course through San Joaquin Valley.  The previous Stockton-Los Angeles Road swung way east where narrower river crossings could be assured.  The fact that such a large inland wetland used to exist so close me is fascinating to ponder over. 

For those not aware the Stockton-Los Angeles Road in San Joaquin Valley essentially is carried by modern analog in the form of the Southern Segment of CA 65 and the unbuilt segment south of Stockton.  The advantage to the corridor aside from flood control would that it would provide another alternative route that climbs above much of the Tule Fog line in addition to giving Foothills communities a direct link to each other.  As far as Central Valley transportation wants go, not having a completed CA 65 is probably the biggest miss.

What do you think the traffic counts would be like on CA-65 had it been built all the way to Sacramento?
I would expect the traffic counts for the 3 Central Valley freeways be I-5 < CA-65 < CA-99

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^

Even now it still feels weird how quickly Fresno dissipates from downtown immediately west of south of 99 (99 is also lined but by the Union Pacific for those that don't know).  The Railroad survey takers from the Central Pacific certainly did a masterful job at plotting out a course through San Joaquin Valley.  The previous Stockton-Los Angeles Road swung way east where narrower river crossings could be assured.  The fact that such a large inland wetland used to exist so close me is fascinating to ponder over. 

For those not aware the Stockton-Los Angeles Road in San Joaquin Valley essentially is carried by modern analog in the form of the Southern Segment of CA 65 and the unbuilt segment south of Stockton.  The advantage to the corridor aside from flood control would that it would provide another alternative route that climbs above much of the Tule Fog line in addition to giving Foothills communities a direct link to each other.  As far as Central Valley transportation wants go, not having a completed CA 65 is probably the biggest miss.

What do you think the traffic counts would be like on CA-65 had it been built all the way to Sacramento?
I would expect the traffic counts for the 3 Central Valley freeways be I-5 < CA-65 < CA-99

Definitely far behind 99 and 5 but nonetheless probably well high to justify a full freeway.  If anything it would probably pull some traffic from 99.  Porterville and Roseville come to mind as places on even present 65 which have significant traffic volumes.  I do think they 198 north to 152 would get some heavy usage from Visalia and Fresno but taper considerably north of there. 

[heynow415]

Because the country needs someplace to source fresh produce during the cold half of the year... 

Which feels strange once you realize how much of northern latitudes San Joaquin Valley and Sacramento Valley are located at.

The northern border of California is at 42 degrees north, which is roughly the same latitude as Detroit, Chicago, and southern New England. Yet the latter locations get winters that are A LOT colder and snowier than the same latitude in California (excluding the mountains).

Much of the reason for the Midwest/Eastern chill are the Arctic storms coming down across the Canadian Shield; even worse is the snow-heavy stuff that shoots directly down mountain-range free through west-central Canada and into the Dakotas and south beyond.  I've encountered this "heavy shit" as far south as I-20 near Big Spring.  As far as far-north CA is concerned, the flatlands east of US 97 get much colder than the canyons and the valleys in the more mountainous western area; winter crops such as horseradish are growing staples there.  Part of the reason for that chilly zone is the fact that while eastern OR features a lot of hilly areas that are a PITA to drive through, those hills just aren't that high, rarely exceeding 5K feet between US 97 and US 395 -- it's easy for Canadian-origin storms to barrel south through eastern Washington (famous for winter wheat!) and across OR into NE CA.  Once there, the mountains to the south break up the storm patterns and mix them with fronts coming in from the ocean.  But right up on the state line it's like a Midwest plain!

California (and Oregon and Washington) west of the Cascades and Sierras also benefit from the moderating effects of marine air coming off the Pacific under normal jet stream patterns.  Places further inland don't benefit from the resulting higher winter humidity which limits extreme cold temperatures.  There are certainly cold snaps that occur when the jet stream shifts pushing colder, drier air out of the north but it is still not even close to a good ol' Chicago winter freeze with some lake effect snow thrown in for good measure.   

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^^^
I can relate to that -- came through Chicago (on Amtrak trip) on December 30, 2001.  Was going to hit a couple of jazz clubs but when I pulled in it was 9 below zero with a wind chill subtracting another 12 degrees.  Holed up in the hotel that night and was only too glad to get out of town on the Southwest Chief to L.A. the next day!  Even though L.A. (actually, the Fullerton depot) was itself cold & clammy when I pulled in, it sure didn't freeze my ass off!

[fungus]

Kettleman City did get use as a freeway accessible toxic waste dump. That probably has arrested residential development more than anything else. https://timeline.com/this-poor-hispanic-town-in-california-has-been-fighting-a-local-toxic-waste-dump-for-35-years-8f6f20f89f9d

[sparker]

Kettleman City did get use as a freeway accessible toxic waste dump. That probably has arrested residential development more than anything else. https://timeline.com/this-poor-hispanic-town-in-california-has-been-fighting-a-local-toxic-waste-dump-for-35-years-8f6f20f89f9d

Except as a potential site for a few housing tracts, likely for Avenal prison personnel, there's little in Kettleman City to serve as an impetus for continued growth with or without the waste dump.  40-odd years ago during the oil crisis there was talk of tapping the Kettleman Hills, which were considered very likely to yield enough petroleum deposits to make such activity worthwhile -- but that time has passed, and the likelihood of doing so today is essentially nonexistent.  Yet placing a waste dump so close to an existing city -- especially one that found a partial "second life" as a service stop for I-5 -- was a faulty idea from the get-go;  but it was likely that  much of the actual valley floor was practically off-limits, that area being dominated by huge agribusiness concerns.  Putting it up in the hills would have been considered a way to effectively "sweep it under the rug", so to speak; making it easy to get to from I-5 would have been part of the overall plan, cynical or not.  Unfortunately, the old saying "money talks" has historically prevailed in CA as well as virtually every other venue at one point or another.